TOMENO, CHRISTOPHER T., PEOPLE v ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •            SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
    645
    KA 15-00278
    PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
    THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
    V                              MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
    CHRISTOPHER T. TOMENO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANET C. SOMES OF
    COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O’BRIEN OF
    COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County
    (Thomas E. Moran, J.), rendered November 24, 2014. The judgment
    convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in
    the first degree.
    It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is
    unanimously affirmed.
    Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him,
    upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the first degree
    (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.15 [4]), for which he was sentenced to a
    determinate term of imprisonment of six years plus a period of
    postrelease supervision. We agree with defendant that his waiver of
    the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity
    of the sentence because “no mention was made on the record during the
    course of the allocution concerning the waiver of defendant’s right to
    appeal his conviction that he was also waiving his right to appeal the
    harshness of his sentence” (People v Pimentel, 108 AD3d 861, 862, lv
    denied 21 NY3d 706; see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928).
    Moreover, although defendant signed a written waiver of the right to
    appeal, the written waiver failed to state that defendant was waiving
    his right to appeal his sentence. Nevertheless, based on our review
    of the record, and considering defendant’s criminal history, which
    includes prior felony convictions, we decline to exercise our power to
    modify the sentence as a matter of discretion in the interest of
    justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [b]).
    Entered:    July 1, 2016                           Frances E. Cafarell
    Clerk of the Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: KA 15-00278

Filed Date: 7/1/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/7/2016